QuebeC VR : I’m all for bring back the Concorde era but chances are it will come to the same fate
Expensive as fuck to maintain and not to mention the fuel cost

Rowan Gontier : Ambitious and inspiring. Wonder why there haven't been more attempts.

Sacto1654 : I think what they're trying to build is essentially taking advantage of the latest knowledge in engine technology and aerodynamic design.
During the 1990's, studies with computational fluid dynamics (CFD) using supercomputers showed that by carefully shaping the entire plane, you can mitigate the pressure wave buildup at supersonic speeds that causes the sonic boom in the first place. It may be now possible to fly at Mach 1.6 at 57,000 to 60,000 feet altitude with a sonic boom so low that it would be quieter than the rumble of a passing train at 1.5 km away, which may open the possibility of overland supersonic flights.
Secondly, engine technology for supersonic flight have tremendously advanced since the 1960's Olympus 593 used on the Concorde. Using variable-cycle engines and engine technology developed originally for today's high-bypass modern jet engines, we can have a engine that in one mode will be as quiet as a high-bypass engine on takeoff and cycle to a different mode for supersonic flight with far more fuel efficiency than the Olympus 593.
Note that I mentioned Mach 1.6. I believe a future supersonic civilian jet will be limited to Mach 1.6 top speed, for a number of reasons. First, it would allow the new jet engines to run with very little amount of reheat (afterburner) mode, which substantially cuts fuel consumption and engine noise, which mean allow transoceanic flights as far as Los Angeles to Beijing even with the majority of the flight at supersonic speeds. Secondly, structural heating would be far lower than on the Concorde, which means less need for expensive titanium and/or stainless structural parts and more use of composite materials, which would substantially cut the structural weight of the plane, also cutting fuel consumption. Finally, with only Mach 1.6 top speed, even with the carefully-shaped airplane design, the pressure wave buildup will be substantially lower than on the Concorde flying at Mach 2.0, making it possible to effectively eliminate the dreaded sonic boom.

MrSkyl1ne : talking about Concorde and showing images of the Tupolev.... amateurs

Jayden Jones : I can't wait for this thing

Gavin Li1117 : 4:21 isn't that the TU-144 NOT the Concorde?

NICHOLAS LANDOLINA : The reason it ran overseas from US to the UK is because people in the US didnt want supersonic booms over top of their housr

ßaron : Still slower than the Concorde... It's insane what these guys were able to do in the 60's.

Jebediah Kerman : What a beautiful aircraft.
Simply astonishing can't wait to see those in the Sky soon.
I shall build this in KSP.

Wunder Spieler : when it flies it does boom

Google User : It will never happen

MS_ B : Is a good effort and I sincerely hope they succeed but naming it BOOM sound like a kid's toy.

Reflections Observer : Likely it will still be affordable by small portion of population due to cost.

Atsuhiko Yasuhiro : A long flight is terrible.
If this plane makes a 14hrs flight to 7hrs, I'll buy the ticket even if it costs twice as much as conventional one.

badlandskid : Fly it to Brazil and call it Boom Boom Airlines

Burns1993Joe : Concorde was 50 years ahead of you guys so don't slate it!

Adrian Nel : Very interesting stuff, but IMHO a limiting factor to commercial supersonic flight is the amount of time it takes to get through security, (board) the plane, load it, refuel, de-ice etc...so much time that any commercial flight is subject to and that supersonic flight will not be exempt from. On say for example a 12 hour journey [from your own bed to the destination hotel bed] post 911, how much of the 12 hours is actual flying time? Ergo, how much time could even halving the flying time (which would require more than doubling the average speed) actually achieve. Of course, a different story for private jets...PLEASE tell me logically and rationally if you feel differently. Thank you.

Martin Lovasz : A great name for the company would be...
CRASH: Concorde Replacement Aircraft Super Homage

Cruzer's World of Retro Wonders : This will be nice while we wait for Elon Musk's electric supersonic plane.

Ghost Reportin' : I think polar, hawaiian, and atlantic flights would be feasible and practical

Ryan Blower : i love how they used the Tupolev Tu-144 and called it the Concorde, these two planes are nothing alike.

Bluecrew7 _ : could this be a scam ? hmm I wonder

Patrick Guinnane : nope...and a stupid name too

Stormforce VII : what is people's issue with the sonic boom? i live on a small island which would be ignored with regards to the noise pollution and remember hearing Concorde flying over head and it was barely noticeable, no where near as loud as living anywhere near an airport?

Peter Peterson : Mankind seems compelled to rush everything inc. time. Humans have developed a world in which they can be anywhere and do anything at a minute's notice yet they are still incredibly unhappy and unfulfilled. Time to re-experience the inner being.

Jonegy : if concorde had been american there would have been no worries regarding the boob

Sean Place : NY to London.
Sub-sonic: $650 , 7 hours
Super-sonic: $5,000, 3.5 hours
That's still ridiculously expensive. But then again, the first many years of passenger aircraft also had extremely high prices.
I hope Boom can pull it off, but I doubt we'll ever see a significant fleet of super-sonic passenger aircraft. They just burn too much fuel and need a lot of maintenance, especially to the paint.

skeelo69 : What the engineer's in France & the UK achieved was the Holy Grail ... Remember the Boeing SST Project ... failed .... your engine pods are way are too small to slow the air down enough , you need to go the way of the SR71- A Blackbird and it's turbo-ramjet setup.. how an earth can you better Concorde with its non-after burning super cruise at Mach 2 will be interesting to see.

a : engines from a cruise missle - engine werent designed to last more than a few hours

Gary Fury : 5.000 for a ticket are you nuts no way so a family of four 20.000 no way i hope you have deep pockets coz your going to need them oh wee point, Tuck your shirt in when you're on the telly.

Fermain Jackson : a bunch of politicians are gonna be in charge to ruin supersonic flight's project. there's a lot of idiots complaining already about that....

Dand AinTac : Like the Concorde, this may find a niche market for the wealthy. I don't see it ever being a mass market aircraft--even if Boom uses more efficient lighter-stronger materials and better engines than the Concorde. Here's why. Those same efficiencies in materials and engines can be used to make subsonic airliners more economical, and they will always be more economical than supersonic airliners. It's a matter of physics. So subsonic airliners will always be cheaper to fly, and flying supersonic is not enough of a speed advantage to make most passengers willing to pay a lot more.

Kill me now : Why not use a scramjet!

Ray Reeves : No addressing of the fact that one of the large reasons concorde failed was because of FAA restrictions on supersonic booms? Its in the name... window smashingingy loud booms. Doesnt seem like they have the type of funding you'd expect for an airline start up, reusing decade old missile engines, and the girl made it sound like she was pretty alone on the engineering aspect.

Andrew Wells : I really wish them all success.

guitarplayerforu : Supersonic is great but i think the real future is Hypersonic. Twice as fast again as supersonic, hypersonic could go from here in the UK to Australia in just 4 hours that's over 10K miles. That's what i call the future. The trouble though with supersonic and hypersonic is that both create massive sonic Booms and so like the concorde has to fly subsonic over land as to not disturb people or cause damage to buildings etc on earth

J Nix : And it's called boom? No thanks 😎

John Smelt : Super cool. I’m not American, but I will say...only the USA could pull this off! Well done guys!!!

Ben Angel : the thing is with the new cockpit, pilots are gonna need to be retrained just for that. having your co pilot behind you instead of next to you is a bit different